- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/scifi/t/814344
Most motorcycle models seen in the movies can be had at a local dealership. But one iconic movie motorcycle hasn’t been available because it wasn’t even real. Until now.
You must log in or register to comment.
Can it make a 90° turn at full speed?
Only on the game grid
Yes. Stay wheels down while doing it? Actually change direction? Ehhhhhhh…maybe not…
Like so many things which look really cool in the context of a heavily stylized cartoon universe, when brought into full physical reality I can’t help but think this looks fairly impractical and just a bit stupid.
Try to imagine it without the fairing, the geometry is in fact not that far from an old school chopper.
Also certain recumbent bicycles have a pretty similar geometry, with the feet positioned even higher than the seat. They ride really well once you roll, just to get your feet of the ground and accelerate from 0 is what takes some getting used to because of the forward facing legs. However, this should be much easier without having to pedal to accelerate. Recumbent cycles are btw significantly faster than conventional cycles.
A jet bike? With no cage or chute? Nah. What could go wrong?
Why do you call it a “jet” bike?
Don’t know what they’re thinking. It clearly has twin ceramic rotor drives on each wheel.
Tetsuo!
Kaneda!
True story: got stuck going to Yearbook Club after school to keep me out of trouble, but the popular kids ran the thing, so I hung out with the other geek: in pre-production. While everyone else only had to walk around and collect orders (slackers), the two of us were saddled with labeling and collating each student picture (and more) according to column and row and page. Being that both of us were way into Photoshop and video editing back then, we decided to see if we could get fake portraits printed in the yearbook.
We knew they had to pass a cursory inspection, so the backdrop had to be the same and the overall composition needed to resemble the distance, palette, and style of the others’ school pics. That year, the other guy (nameless to protect the innocent) showed up in our yearbook as Brandon Lee’s The Crow, and my pic was Kaneda from the lock-up scene right before the grenade guy, when he looks over at Kaori. 🤘🏼
Seems like an incredibly awkward way to sit on a motorcycle.
It is called feet forward and is considered safer.
90 mph top speed…c’mon 🤬
It’s also less than $30k, assuming the price isn’t a typo. Tbh I feel like that’s a reasonable trade-off because it’s at least affordable.
30k is like really expensive for a motorcycle.
You can buy a high end BMW s1000rr or Yamaha R1m for around 20k, and both of those go close to 200mph and have tons of high tech riding assist features all while looking like a piece of art.
This thing is a scooter that they put a body on and are charging a ridiculous amount for.
This.
I mean, it’s an art bike (see: 1 Moto Show, et al), so I get it. You’re not wrong about some bikes transcending their humble origins. 🤘🏼
I disagree that this is an art bike. This is a gimmicky replica knockoff of existing art banking on nostalgia for its value. The makers of it aren’t expressing their artistic vision. They’re making a cash grab from nerds who grew up and made enough money to buy shit they wanted when they were kids.
If someone made this as a passion project because they were the nerd that grew up and wanted to bring it to life for themselves…then I’d call it an art bike. Instead it’s a product.
You’re confusing “art” with “art you like”. All gallery art exists to “make a cash grab from nerds who grew up and made enough money to buy shit they want”, FFS. Really, just depends on your definition of nerd. Just because you don’t want to buy it doesn’t don’t its value as art for those who appreciate it. 🤓
No I am not confusing them.
Again art is created with creative expression.
A thing that is designed to be made in numbers for the purpose of selling to customers isn’t art.
If this is art then a Tesla cars, iPhones, and and Stanley cups are all art. Someone designed all those things…but they are products.
This thing doesn’t even have a design that was made by those selling it. It’s a copy of someone’s art, made into a product.
So, “a copy of someone’s art” is not art and simply being a product invalidates a thing’s ability to be art? Interesting take, and I think you’ll find that it’s not only resoundingly false but completely unsupported. You are, in fact, mistaking the definition of “art”. Try again?
Dont go 90 mph
🤡
Can we bring the Akira demon beast to life as well?
I’d settle for 2077’s SAMURAI jacket 🔥
deleted by creator
